'Ticket to Kerala': A Primer on Malayalam Cinema, and Then Some

S.R. Praveen has been covering Malayalam cinema for The Hindu since 2012, and in some sense, it was an exciting period to begin cataloguing—as both critic and journalist. A new wave was upon Malayalam cinema. When the pandemic struck, a new audience was upon Malayalam cinema—discovering it through the “one-inch tall barrier of subtitles”. The questions linger. How did Malayalam cinema come to be? Is the current moment a retreading of a past moment? How do we contextualise this hyper-localised storytelling against a background of pan-Indian paranoia, but also the larger sweep of Indian cinema? 

In his debut book, Ticket To Kerala: The Story of Malayalam Cinema, Praveen attempts to answer these small and large questions, archiving Malayalam cinema, charting the new wave movements — two of them — the stars who shone, dimmed, and disappeared, and the others who withstood, and the directors who have ushered in these various phases. 

In a conversation, the author outlines the larger themes of the text.

Malayalam cinema had a new lease of life on streaming during the pandemic when it was suddenly being “discovered”. The “Prakriti padangal”, that you write about, was being consumed voraciously. Why do you think that was?

‘Prakriti Padangal’, a pejorative used for realistic films by those who strongly root for mass-masala films, has had considerable audience support in Kerala even before the pandemic. The pandemic-time popularity on OTT platforms was mostly with an audience from outside Kerala, for whom the rooted, realistic, and relatively smaller films from the Malayalam industry were probably a refreshing change from what was being dished out in their respective industries.

Has Malayalam cinema always embraced these naturalistic forms of storytelling? How would you see films like Patriot and Lucifer 2—large, massy, pan Indian films—in this context?

Both realistic films as well as big commercial projects with mass-masala elements have co-existed in Malayalam for a long time. Both the superstars, Mohanlal and Mammootty, who achieved superstardom through mass roles, have done their share of films shorn of any commercial elements. But the larger-than-life films are also important, for they help sustain the industry and reap surplus revenues which sometimes get invested back in smaller, interesting projects which need a leg up. 

The best of contemporary Malayalam mainstream cinema still retains some of the character of the industry’s mainstream films of the 1980s and early 90s, with strong, engaging screenplays and well-etched characters. This is perhaps what sets apart even the massy films in Malayalam from the rest of the pan-Indian wave.

You write about the two “New Waves” in Malayalam cinema—one in the 1970s and one in the 2010s. How are they different from each other—in the way they deploy politics and stardom?

The first new wave in the early 1970s essentially happened just in independent cinema, with no trace of it visible in the mainstream. It took some more years for the evolution of middle-of-the-road cinema, blending the best elements of independent and mainstream films. 

In the 2010s, the new wave took effect in mainstream Malayalam cinema, with a clear break from what came just before it. In both waves, stardom was subsumed into the narrative, with the writer’s and filmmaker’s visions often getting precedence, rather than the way it is in star vehicles. 

Politically, the new wave cinema of the 1970s grappled with the vestiges of feudalism, existential issues which were all the vogue in modernist literature of that era as well as with issues that brought about a sense of disillusionment in a large section of people in the post-Independence era. The new wave in the mainstream cinema of 2010s aimed at countering the unwelcome tendencies that plagued the industry in the late 1990s and 2000s by foregrounding gender politics, anti-caste narratives, and class politics also to an extent.

How is the stardom of, say, a Prithviraj Sukumaran or Dulquer Salmaan, different from that of Mammootty and Mohanlal? Has the format of stardom itself changed?

I guess the kind of stardom being enjoyed by Mammootty and Mohanlal for close to four decades is a product of the times and might not be repeated again. The dream run that they had in the late 1980s and early 1990s, with over 30 quality films each in some years, is not attainable again because the industry is a bit more fragmented now and doesn’t any longer revolve around one or two individuals. 

Nor do we have such a strong set of writers to create a wide variety of roles for the younger crop to evolve into the phenomena these two became. Even the two superstars were able to survive an extended phase of below par films post-millennium due to the goodwill of the remarkable work they did in the initial years. 

None of the younger stars are doing that many films these days. They do have a strong following but they are yet to reach anywhere near the levels of stardom enjoyed by the superstars. Of course, Fahadh Faasil has shown us that a different kind of stardom is possible in the new era without doing many mass-y things.

Can you talk about how film festivals like International Film Festival of Kerala (IFFK) bolstered the new wave? In your text, Bina Paul notes that the current exciting phase in Malayalam cinema “come[s] from the festival space, which gave many people the courage to make films with the voice they really find over here.” Have the filmmakers in the new wave themselves spoke about IFFK and its influence?

IFFK was a natural progression of film society culture that truly changed the cinema landscape of Kerala from the 1960s. The festival itself was created owing to a push from the film society crowd. A well-curated festival, especially ones like IFFK which focuses on cinema from third world countries, can go a long way in preparing the audience for a different kind of cinema-viewing habit as well as in instilling confidence in budding filmmakers to explore difficult subjects and experiment with form. Independent filmmakers like Don Palathara, Krishand, Prasanth Vijay and others have been more forthright in acknowledging the influence that festivals like IFFK had in their lives.

I remember P.S.Vinothraj, who made the award-winning Tamil film Pebbles (Koozhangal), recollecting his experience of queuing up regularly at IFFK.

Why has the studio system which Tamil, Telugu, and Hindi cinema swore by at some point, not animated Malayalam cinema?

In the 1950s and 1960s, Malayalam cinema was very much under the control of the studio system, chiefly Udaya and Merryland studios. Between them, these studios made the most number of films with the major stars of that era. The competition between these two studios, with everything from the poaching of stars to the making of similar genre of films in bigger and better forms, in a way paved the way for the growth of the industry in its early years. The two businessmen running these studios slowly turned into filmmakers too, with each of them directing over 40 to 50 films. The influence of the studios naturally waned in later years as more players entered the scene.

The Hema Committee report is something that has charged the discourse around Malayalam cinema these past few years. Has that had any material implications in Kerala? Or is it just a passing moment?

The initial shock that the Hema Committee report gave to the industry and the larger Kerala society might not have sustained as expected, but it has brought about a lot of changes. Most notable is the formation of internal committees in all production units as well as film organisations. The Kerala government also made a wide-ranging film policy based on the report’s recommendations and consultations. More than anything, it gives confidence to more women to come and work in the industry, while habitual offenders are fearful of repercussions. The disappointing part, of course, is that many past offenders have not yet been punished, while the legal process is on in some cases.

If you have to curate five essential Malayalam films that travel the range and breadth of the book, what would those films be?

Neelakkuyil (1954) - Directed by P.Bhaskaran and Ramu Kariat

Elippathayam (1982) - Directed by Adoor Gopalakrishnan

Irakal (1985) - Directed by K.G.George

Manichithrathazhu (1993) - Directed by Fazil

Annayum Rasoolum (2013) - Directed by Rajeev Ravi